What a horrible thought, really. This is Microsoft saying Yup, we would prefer to try and fail to kill any innovation in the web, as per usual. It will be for nothing. Again, again, again.

Its all graphic designers. 95.78% of the passwords where permutations of "Justin Bieber"

I guess you are speaking about yourself? The common carrier rules are there to prevent the owner of the pipe from extorting the provider of goods and services that use or are enhanced by communication. If that rule was not in place, a telecom could have blocked or extra-charged a pizza place over another, thus leveraging its natural monopoly onto unrelated markets.

This is the exact same case between content creators and last mile owners and that is precisely what will happen from now on. They are creating a concentrated, protected market, and incentivising oligopolic pricing on the part of the utility last-mile owners who want to grow at the expense of content creators.

Now grow some balls and explain what do you mean by "internet transit". ATT has a fuckload of customers and controls whatever comes in or out of its net at will.

You cannot get health care in america with the start of the trumpcare age, so why bother with doctors at all.

Look at the guys. Its clear they all just want your jobs and to introduce mass bombers in those bras of them.

Check them out:
http://higia.tech/

And by that standard the fucking internet would not exist.

Then proceded to sue the pants off Berkeley ... ah the Unix wars... those were the days, maaaaan....

... of overspending on a trinket, 6GB Joe and Jane will say anything to save face.

Make no mistake. Only billion dollar corporations get to speak at a presidential debate.

Trump is an asshole. So is Hillary if you ask me. Your choice is between an asshole and an asshole.

Enjoy democracy.

I've been a true blue IT pro foss loonix guy for most of the last 16 years. And every year. Nay. Every 6-10 months some hardware designed to "thwart" crackers, and other crypto attackers goes the way of the dodo.

I think the industry looks at security the wrong way and the lulzsec guys weren't wrong in that ideological rant they made. You can't predict the unpredictable. Firewalls aren't a wall in any meaningful sense. "Software defined" networks are just a catchphrase for networking complex things in a dynamic manner. Intrusion Prevention Systems do not prevent. Hell, if you let your cisco guy deploy it, it wont even log a thing and when it dies you will have no idea why.

Bollocks, Shenanigans and costly Stupidity (don't get me started on "hardware routers" or "storage networks"). This is what I have found in my years in the battlefields, young grasshoppers. And a deeply felt wish that I had chosen archeology instead.

No.

What is this "virtualizing" the "interface" kerfufelisch nonesense.... no no, my friend. You are severely mistaken. Sand Boxing is NOT "about" virtualizing. Sand boxing is about isolating upper layers from lower layers. This can be achieved by virtualization or through not virtualization. How about that?

No. Sand Boxing is not necesarily virtualisation, although any virtualization technology by definition sandboxes whatever runs on top of it (some do it very paranoically, some less so).

And you post as AC. I chastize you with my very intelligent gaze.

Course not. What kind of a thai chick with a dick has hair in her balls. That is so very insensitive of you tu suggest.

I dont see a place for analysts and architects. Well. Architects that design buildings maybe. But not in software.

And i have never, ever met a competent Project Manager that boasts the title.

Just my 10 bits.